What do the healthcare experiences of people with long-term conditions tell us about person-centred care? A systematic review.

Joanne Reeve, J. Seymour, Myriam. Dell Olio, S. Pask
{"title":"What do the healthcare experiences of people with long-term conditions tell us about person-centred care? A systematic review.","authors":"Joanne Reeve, J. Seymour, Myriam. Dell Olio, S. Pask","doi":"10.5750/EJPCH.V7I4.1779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction \nGrowing numbers of people now live with long term conditions. For each person, the challenges are multiple and unique to that individual. In recognition of this, health policy places greater emphasis on the delivery of person-centred care (PCC). However, patients report declining levels of such care. One reason for this may be a mismatch between patient and professional/policy understanding of PCC. \nAim \nTo understand PCC from the perspectives of people with long-term conditions. \nMethods \nA systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted. Databases searched included ASSIA, BNI, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and grey literature databases. Two reviewers independently screened and selected the studies, assessed their quality, and extracted data. Fifty-four records were analysed through meta-ethnography. \nResults \nFour themes emerged: the healthcare system as a battlefield, the healthcare system as a maze, patients’ accounts of personhood, and the centrality of patient enablement. A person-centred healthcare system is described by this review as one that values personhood and enables patients to build knowledge with their clinician in order to manage their illness in a safe, caring, and accessible environment. \nConclusion \nPCC does not depend on the efforts of the clinician alone, but results from a collaboration with the patient and needs to be enabled by the wider organisational and educational systems. Efforts directed at the implementation of PCC might be bound to fail if the healthcare policy agenda does not address the role of the patient’s personhood in clinical practice, and its integration in educational settings.","PeriodicalId":72966,"journal":{"name":"European journal for person centered healthcare","volume":"87 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal for person centered healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/EJPCH.V7I4.1779","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction Growing numbers of people now live with long term conditions. For each person, the challenges are multiple and unique to that individual. In recognition of this, health policy places greater emphasis on the delivery of person-centred care (PCC). However, patients report declining levels of such care. One reason for this may be a mismatch between patient and professional/policy understanding of PCC. Aim To understand PCC from the perspectives of people with long-term conditions. Methods A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted. Databases searched included ASSIA, BNI, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and grey literature databases. Two reviewers independently screened and selected the studies, assessed their quality, and extracted data. Fifty-four records were analysed through meta-ethnography. Results Four themes emerged: the healthcare system as a battlefield, the healthcare system as a maze, patients’ accounts of personhood, and the centrality of patient enablement. A person-centred healthcare system is described by this review as one that values personhood and enables patients to build knowledge with their clinician in order to manage their illness in a safe, caring, and accessible environment. Conclusion PCC does not depend on the efforts of the clinician alone, but results from a collaboration with the patient and needs to be enabled by the wider organisational and educational systems. Efforts directed at the implementation of PCC might be bound to fail if the healthcare policy agenda does not address the role of the patient’s personhood in clinical practice, and its integration in educational settings.
长期疾病患者的医疗保健经历告诉我们什么以人为本的护理?系统回顾。
越来越多的人患有长期疾病。对每个人来说,挑战都是多重的,对每个人来说都是独一无二的。认识到这一点,卫生政策更加强调提供以人为本的护理。然而,患者报告这种护理水平正在下降。造成这种情况的一个原因可能是患者与专业/政策对PCC的理解不匹配。目的从长期患者的角度了解PCC。方法系统回顾定性文献。检索的数据库包括ASSIA、BNI、CINAHL、Cochrane Library、Embase、Medline、PsycINFO、PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和灰色文献数据库。两名审稿人独立筛选和选择研究,评估其质量,并提取数据。通过元民族志分析了54份记录。结果出现了四个主题:医疗系统作为战场,医疗系统作为迷宫,患者对人格的描述,以及患者使能的中心地位。本综述将以人为本的医疗保健系统描述为重视人格,使患者能够与临床医生建立知识,以便在安全,关怀和无障碍的环境中管理他们的疾病。结论PCC不依赖于临床医生单独的努力,而是与患者合作的结果,需要更广泛的组织和教育系统的支持。如果医疗保健政策议程不能解决患者人格在临床实践中的作用,并将其与教育环境相结合,那么针对PCC实施的努力可能注定会失败。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信